CHIKKAPAPAIAH DEAD BY HIS LRS v. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS
WP/16344/2014 · 2026-06-03
E S Indiresh
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 19215 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 19215 (KAR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
- 1 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26101 WP No. 16344 of 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF JUNE, 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO. 16344 OF 2014 (KLR-RR/SUR) BETWEEN:
1. CHIKKAPAPAIAH DEAD BY HIS LRS
NARAYANAMMA W/O CHIKKAPAPAIAH AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS
2. MUNISWAMY S/O CHIKKAPAPAIAH AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
3. VENKATARAMANAPPA S/O CHIKKAPAPAIAH AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS
4. VENKATALAKSHMAMMA W/O CHIKKAPAPAIAH AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS
5. MUNIYAMMA D/O CHIKKAPAPAIAH AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS
6. MUNILAKSHMI D/O CHIKKAPAPAIAH AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS
Digitally signed by CHAYA S A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
- 2 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26101 WP No. 16344 of 2014
ALL ARE R/O NEELAKANTA AGRAHARA KASABA HBOLI MALUR TALUK KOLAR DISTRICT …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. MANJUNATH D M.,ADVOCATE) AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY ITS REVENUE SECRETARY VIKASA SOUDHA BANGALORE - 560 001
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KOLAR DISTRICT KOLAR - 56313
3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER KOLAR SUB DIVISION KOLAR - 56313
4. NARAYANAPPA S/O CHIKKAMUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
5. CHIKKAGOVINDAPPA S/O MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS
6. NARAYANAPPA S/O MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS
7. KRISHNAPPA S/O MUNIVENKATAPPA AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
- 3 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26101 WP No. 16344 of 2014
8. SOMAPPA S/O KALKERE MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
9. RAVI S/O CHIKKA MUNIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
10. CHINNAPPA S/O NANDIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS
11. RAMASWAMY S/O AIYAR MUNISWAMY AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
12. NAGAPPA S/O SHAMANNA AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS
13. SHANKARAPPA S/O VENKATASWAMAPPA AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
14. LAKSHMAIAH S/O DODDAPAPAIAH AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS
15. NARAYANASWAMY S/O CHANDRAPPA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
16. LAKSHMAIAH S/O KARIYAPPA AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
- 4 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26101 WP No. 16344 of 2014
17. SANDEPPA S/O LAKSHMAIAH AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS
RESPONDENTS NO.4 TO 17 ARE R/O NEELAKANTA AGRAHARA KASABA HOBLI MALUR TALUK KOLAR DISTRICT - 56313 …RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. SPOORTHY HEGDE N., HCGP FOR R1-R3; SRI.
V. VISHWANATHA SHETTY, ADVOCATE FOR R4-R9, R12, R13, R15-R17; R10, R11 AND R14 ARE SERVED)
THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER VIDE ANN-A DATED 22.1.2014 PASSED BY THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KOLAR IN R.A. NO.2/2009-10 AND ORDER VIDE ANN-B DATED 31.3.2009 PASSED BY THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER KOLAR SUB DIVISION, KOLAR IN R.A.
NO.148/1996-97 AND RESTORE THE ORDER PASSED BY TAHASILDAR DATED 4.3.1993. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH
- 5 -
HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:26101 WP No. 16344 of 2014
ORAL ORDER
Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. 2. In this petition, petitioners are assailing the impugned Order dated 22.01.2014 (Annexure-A) passed by the respondent no. 2 and Order dated 31.03.2009 passed by the respondent no. 3 (Annexure-B). 3. Having taken note of the submissions made by learned counsels appearing for the parties, it is not in dispute that the petitioners are claiming right over the property based on the temporary change of Katha made by the Competent Authority. 4. In that view of the matter, since the land in question has been reserved for the public purpose and taking into account the findings recorded by both the authorities below on merits, there is no perversity in the impugned order at Annexure-A and Annexure- B.
Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. SD/-
(E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE
HR